On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys via Lazarus < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 2017-05-04 15:56, Juha Manninen via Lazarus wrote: > > I have seen comments saying that treating UTF-16 as fixed width > > encoding is OK because the characters outside BMP are so rare. It is > > like saying that a buggy spreadsheet app is OK because it calculates > > the sums wrong only sometimes. IMO such people should not do > > programming. > > +1 > I purchased a commercial text editor renowned for having excellent > Unicode support - at least that is what ALL the reviews said. Umm > yeah, to my disappointment it internally uses UTF-16 (because it is > written in Delphi), and treats UTF-16 as 2-byte fixed width! WTF! > To play the devil's advocate, the fact that ALL reviews said that it has excellent support for Unicode means that characters outside the BMP *are* rare. After all, BMP does include practically all languages used today. I mean, it isn't technically correct, it is just that in practice it is good enough for a very large number of tasks.
-- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus-ide.org/listinfo/lazarus
